Why the Demolition of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Cover-up

[walkyrie]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area , therefore another excuse have to be found to explain the suspicious destruction of the WTC7 ..... FIRE

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=112611


.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight

By David Ray Griffin

Found your problem for you.

[MikeW]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful
Ah, more deception from Griffin. We're back to the "evaporated steel" as evidence that temperatures exceeded 2,800 degrees F, for instance, but like all truthers, Griffin must suppress relevant evidence. So he doesn't tell us what FEMA said about the required temperatures to produce the observed "evaporation":

Sample 1:
The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 degrees C (1,800 degrees F), which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel...

Sample 2:
Temperatures in this region of the steel were likely to be in the range of 700 to 800 degrees C (1290 - 1470 degrees F).
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

Later studies saw the minimum temperature reduced further, 550 to 800 degrees C (http://www.911myths.com/html/sulfur_at_the_wtc.html).

There's the sulphur, of course. Griffin makes that sound mysterious here (from the OP link):

Another part of the mystery was that atoms in the steel seemed to have combined with sulfur “to form compounds that melt at lower temperatures,” but as to the source of the sulfur, “no one knows.”14


But again, being a truther means you must deceive and cherry-pick, so he ignores this quote (even though he should know about it as he quotes from other parts of the article):

"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html

Now let's wait for someone to tell us that Biederman doesn't know that the sulphur came from acid rain, therefore Griffin was correct to say "no one knows" the source. Truthers are good as excusing their lies (but then they've had a lot of practice).

[Hokulele]

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 ...


I don't suppose you have any actual evidence of this plane and this plot, do you?


Hint, wild speculation does not equal evidence.

[GlennB]

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area ,

Given that the "controlled demolition party area" of WTC7 was totally surrounded - at very close quarters - by massive buildings then the "military aircargo" would have needed to be a helicopter. And a small nimble one at that.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

This passage is rife with stinkers:
Nanothermite: A peer-reviewed report by University of Copenhagen chemist Niels Harrit and several co-authors, including physicist Steven Jones and chemist Kevin Ryan, showed that the WTC dust contained unreacted nanothermite. Unlike ordinary thermite, which is an incendiary, nanothermite is a high explosive.

This report by Harrit, Jones, Ryan, and their colleagues did not appear until 2009,45 so it could not have been mentioned in NIST’s final report, which came out at the end of November 2008. However, given the standard guidelines for the investigation of building fires, NIST should have tested the WTC dust for signs of incendiaries, such as ordinary thermite (including thermate), and explosives, such as nanothermite.46
When asked whether it had carried out such tests, NIST said it had not.47 When a reporter asked NIST spokesman Michael Newman why not, he replied: “[B]ecause there was no evidence of that.” When the reporter asked the obvious follow-up question, “[H]ow can you know there’s no evidence if you don’t look for it first?” Newman replied: “If you’re looking for something that isn’t there, you’re wasting your time . . . and the taxpayers’ money.”48

There's never been any peer reviewed papers on magic thermite in the WTC. That's a flat out lie right there.

No formulation of thermite has ever been observed to behave as an explosive.

He states the NIST should have tested for thermite but appears to be operating from a position of extreme ignorance as the chemical composition of thermite is identical to the most common chemical elements that composed the twin towers themselves. Thermite (or thermate) is composed of iron (steel girders), aluminum (the towers outer cladding) and sometimes sulfur (gypsum based drywall). Had the NIST tested for thermite residue, they would have found 2 million tons of it.... and the results would have been scientifically useless.

From this we can conclude that David Griffin doesn't know a bloody thing about the World Trade Center.

[cyclonic]

David ray griffin = the 3 stooges in 1 body lol.

[twinstead]

I have to seriously question the sanity of somebody who believes Griffin's idiocy no questions asked, yet has the balls to imply WE are the sheep.

[RedIbis]

Ah, more deception from Griffin. We're back to the "evaporated steel" as evidence that temperatures exceeded 2,800 degrees F, for instance, but like all truthers, Griffin must suppress relevant evidence. So he doesn't tell us what FEMA said about the required temperatures to produce the observed "evaporation":



Later studies saw the minimum temperature reduced further, 550 to 800 degrees C (http://www.911myths.com/html/sulfur_at_the_wtc.html).

There's the sulphur, of course. Griffin makes that sound mysterious here (from the OP link):



But again, being a truther means you must deceive and cherry-pick, so he ignores this quote (even though he should know about it as he quotes from other parts of the article):



Now let's wait for someone to tell us that Biederman doesn't know that the sulphur came from acid rain, therefore Griffin was correct to say "no one knows" the source. Truthers are good as excusing their lies (but then they've had a lot of practice).

So you really think it was acid rain?

[Dave Rogers]

So you really think it was acid rain?

Acid rain is a better explanation than thermate. For it to have come from thermate requires that the thermate only heated steel to about 1000ºC; in other words, that it didn't do what the conspiracy theorists want it to have done, which is heat the steel to melting point. We know the steel wasn't heated to its melting point, because actual melting, rather than high temperature corrosion, rounds off edges due to surface tension. But Griffin won't worry about that; he needs thermate both to have melted the steel, and at the same time not to have heated it above 1000ºC, so in his imagination that's exactly what it did.

Being a truther also means that you must reject hypotheses where some details are not clearly known, and replace them with ones that are physically impossible or even self-contradictory.

Dave

[twinstead]

Being a truther also means that you must reject hypotheses where some details are not clearly known, and replace them with ones that are physically impossible or even self-contradictory.


This is a very good explanation of what separates truther "investigators" from actual investigators.

[MikeW]

So you really think it was acid rain?
My opinion is irrelevant. This is about Griffin's dishonest presentation, omitting possible explanations so he can lead readers in the direction he wants. So, for instance, Griffin ends one quote like this:

‘The important questions," says [one of the professors], ‘are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from?’”
http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=112611

Carefully omitting the real ending, as I mentioned before:

"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html

Acid rain is Biederman's suggestion, not mine. Given that Griffin is happy to quote him elsewhere, then he should mention this, too, not leave it out. But then, 9/11 truth depends on suppressing relevant evidence so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

[leftysergeant]

There were Class A fuels which contained a large amount of sulphur burning in the pile. There were lead-acid batteries every bloody place. The acid in those batteries is SULPHURIC acid. FDNY started pouring water on the pile from the get-go and didn't stop until most of the pile had been dug up. Much of it turned to steam under the pile.

If you heat sheet rock, it will release sulphur compounds. You burn rubber and cheap dieselm it releases sulphur componds You heat a sulphuric acid solution, it will produce an acid vapor.

Combine that with steam and you have a highly reactive acid that will do a serious number on steel. The acid rain was produced in an enclosed space by FDNY.

[RedIbis]

My opinion is irrelevant. This is about Griffin's dishonest presentation, omitting possible explanations so he can lead readers in the direction he wants. So, for instance, Griffin ends one quote like this:



Carefully omitting the real ending, as I mentioned before:



Acid rain is Biederman's suggestion, not mine. Given that Griffin is happy to quote him elsewhere, then he should mention this, too, not leave it out. But then, 9/11 truth depends on suppressing relevant evidence so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

Maybe he left it out because Griffin realizes that this was nothing more than a suggestion. After all, you didn't include how the author concludes the article:

Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. [...]Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community.

But we all know that WPI did not obtain NISt funding, nor any more samples. And in fact, NIST didn't even bother to request the WTC 7 steel sample that WPI had. So there never was much hope that NIST would "clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community."

[beachnut]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area , therefore another excuse have to be found to explain the suspicious destruction of the WTC7 ..... FIRE

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=112611


.
Who will cover-up your gullibility to believe these delusional stories? lol, you believe in the insane rant of an insane biased old man; he makes it up to sell his books. You have fallen for the cover-up of capitalism. Good job finding the dumbest junk on 911.

[MikeW]

Maybe he left it out because Griffin realizes that this was nothing more than a suggestion.
Biederman is better able than Griffin to assess whether this is a likely possibility, I think. If Griffin thinks acid rain is unlikely then he should deal with that in his article, not snip it out and pretend it doesn't exist.

But this isn't his only omission. Griffin also forgets to tell his readers that the "evaporated" steel wasn't thought to have seen temperatures outside those of a conventional fire. And then he goes on to use words, like "evaporated", rather than the temperature range reported by FEMA and others, to pretend that the samples are evidence for the presence of thermate.

Go ahead, excuse that if you like. But it seems pretty dishonest and deceptive to me.

[Kent1]

Biederman is better able than Griffin to assess whether this is a likely possibility, I think. If Griffin thinks acid rain is unlikely then he should deal with that in his article, not snip it out and pretend it doesn't exist.

But this isn't his only omission. Griffin also forgets to tell his readers that the "evaporated" steel wasn't thought to have seen temperatures outside those of a conventional fire. And then he goes on to use words, like "evaporated", rather than the temperature range reported by FEMA and others, to pretend that the samples are evidence for the presence of thermate.

Go ahead, excuse that if you like. But it seems pretty dishonest and deceptive to me.

Or he could of simply asked Barnett about the "evaporated" steel and what he thought might of been the cause, like I did.

It seems clear Griffin doesn't want to really research these topics outside of his own sloppy innuendo. This is again a very old topic long since discussed. His books wouldn't sell very well if he was honest.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

It seems clear Griffin doesn't want to really research these topics outside of his own sloppy innuendo.

The last thing any truther wants to do is investigate 9/11.

[ElMondoHummus]

There were Class A fuels which contained a large amount of sulphur burning in the pile. There were lead-acid batteries every bloody place. The acid in those batteries is SULPHURIC acid. FDNY started pouring water on the pile from the get-go and didn't stop until most of the pile had been dug up. Much of it turned to steam under the pile.

If you heat sheet rock, it will release sulphur compounds. You burn rubber and cheap dieselm it releases sulphur componds You heat a sulphuric acid solution, it will produce an acid vapor.

Combine that with steam and you have a highly reactive acid that will do a serious number on steel. The acid rain was produced in an enclosed space by FDNY.

Let's not forget the EPA study which suggested that much of the sulfur could have come from the CRT monitors prevalent in the offices. Lets also not forget the NSF paper which noted (http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/03/pr0309.htm):

The high levels of calcium, strontium, and sulfur concentrations found in the near-surface sediments of the cores, are consistent with presence of gypsum as a parent material. Gypsum is extensively used as drywall in building construction.

Yes, I'm aware that this paper was not speaking towards the eutectic remnants, but rather the sediment found in NY Harbor after 9/11. But the point of bringing this up is to show just how ubiquitous sulfur was; a large amount was washed into the harbor as runoff from the firefighting. Drywall is very much a leading candidate for being a majority contributor to the sulfur in the rubble piles and therefore is a highly likely source for the sulfur in the eutectic reactions.

Sulfur sources has been discussed over and over and over, and not knowing specifically where the particular sulfur came from that caused the eutectic erosion in the towers is not the same as saying the source is unknown. It's only saying it's impossible to pin down which of the many different sources it came from. It's definitely not the same as opening the door to exotic BS like thermate. There were myriad sources available; Frank Greening considers quite a few of them here, in his paper:
http://www.911myths.com/Sulfur.pdf

DRG is simply dishonest. He's misrepresenting what's known about the rubble piles. We know that multiple sources contributed to the total sulfur availability merely through the fact that those sources were present, and untangling which of those original sources was responsible makes about as much sense as figuring out which kernel of corn in your can came from which cob in the cornfield. The point is that there's a whole field to provide the corn, and that there's a total sulfur "load" present in the towers from the plethora of sources. But like I've said before, this is how conspiracy peddler's operate: By subtracting necessary context. It's all too typical of these charlatans.

[Kent1]

I'll post this again also.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: XXXXXXXXXXX
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 6:57 PM
> To: Barnett, Jonathan Ross
> Subject: Question about building 7 steel?
>
> Dear Mr. Barnett,
>
> I wanted to double check that these links were the "partly evaporated"
> steel you referred to within your
> 2001 interview. Also what was your guestimate as to the source of the
> sulfur within the samples.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> Scott Sleeper
>
>
>
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...rman-0112.html
> http://www.me.wpi.edu/MTE/People/imsm.html



- "Barnett, Jonathan Ross" <XXXXXXXX> wrote:

> These are the correct links. Possible sources of enough sulfer:
>
> -Heating oil (extr high probability)
> -Construction materials such as gyp wallboard dust (extr high
> probability) -environmental sources such as acid rain (high)
>
> Hope this helps! Bottom line is that this is an area that needs
> further study
>
> Dr. Jonathan R. Barnett, Professor, Fire Protection Engineering, WPI
> XXXXXXX
> XXX XXX XXXX AIM:
> XXXXXX, Yahoo: XXXXXXX, MSN: XXXXXXXXXX

[willhaven]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7What controlled demolition implosion? I certainly didn't hear any explosions when WTC 7 went down.

[Quad4_72]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area , therefore another excuse have to be found to explain the suspicious destruction of the WTC7 ..... FIRE

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=112611


.

That's dumb

[Kent1]

That's dumb

"Hess thereby reported a mid-morning explosion in WTC 7."

I see Griffin also edited out that the interview was at 11:58 and Hess said "trapped in 7 World Trade Center for the last hour and a half." He also says about 90 minutes in another part of the interview.

The tower came down at 10:28. A perfect match. But this was info from a previous Griffen snafu. Where he got the times wrong. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127134

[Edx]

Carefully omitting the real ending, as I mentioned before:





Sounds like the "like a cruise missile with wings" quote-mine he used.

[phunk]

"Hess thereby reported a mid-morning explosion in WTC 7."

I see Griffin also edited out that the interview was at 11:58 and Hess said "trapped in 7 World Trade Center for the last hour and a half." He also says about 90 minutes in another part of the interview.

The tower came down at 11:28. A perfect match. But this was info from a previous Griffen snafu. Where he got the times wrong. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=127134

Which tower came down at 11:28?

[Kent1]

Which tower came down at 11:28?

Whoops, typo, 10:28. Thanks.:o

[Bell]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area , therefore another excuse have to be found to explain the suspicious destruction of the WTC7 ..... FIRE

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=112611


.

This seems fitting:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/stripgenerator/strip/16/76/73/00/00/full.png

[djlunacee]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area , therefore another excuse have to be found to explain the suspicious destruction of the WTC7 ..... FIRE

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=112611


.

There was no cover up, therefore no problem. Case Closed.

[sheeplesnshills]

[QUOTE=walkyrie;6010372]Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

But since it was not demolished..........

[ImANiceGuy]

Ok, so I get that DRG's credibility leaves a little to be desired; he is a profiteer.

I quickly read through his lengthy article posted in the op, as well as Greening's article on sources of sulphur...

At the certain risk of ridicule, and exposed ignorance of basic chemistry...

I'm sure I read somewhere, in a refutation to the debunker's sulphur sources (eg. batteries, oil, gypsum.) that the sulphur which corroded the piece of steel in question had to be present in elemental form in order to produce a eutectic? Any scientific basis to this? This is their 'most-current' rebuttal for common sulfur sources as far as I can see...

[Dave Rogers]

I'm sure I read somewhere, in a refutation to the debunker's sulphur sources (eg. batteries, oil, gypsum.) that the sulphur which corroded the piece of steel in question had to be present in elemental form in order to produce a eutectic? Any scientific basis to this? This is their 'most-current' rebuttal for common sulfur sources as far as I can see...

No basis whatsoever; in fact, it's simply wrong. Sulphur is most corrosive as a component of sulphuric acid, which is produced by dissolving sulphur dioxide in water. Sulphur dioxide is known to be released by thermal degradation of the sulphates in wallboard at temperatures in the region of 1000ºC. Therefore, degradation of components of the building is an entirely plausible mechanism, not just for the source of sulphur, but for its presence in a highly corrosive form.

Dave

[ImANiceGuy]

No basis whatsoever; in fact, it's simply wrong. Sulphur is most corrosive as a component of sulphuric acid, which is produced by dissolving sulphur dioxide in water. Sulphur dioxide is known to be released by thermal degradation of the sulphates in wallboard at temperatures in the region of 1000ºC. Therefore, degradation of components of the building is an entirely plausible mechanism, not just for the source of sulphur, but for its presence in a highly corrosive form.

Dave

Thanks Dave. I'm learning more tonight about eutectics than Emile Durkheim; the difference is I'll be tested on my Durkheim knowledge at 0900hrs.

EDIT: First question was worded incorrectly.....

[ImANiceGuy]

From FEMA appendix C on the piece of metal in question...www.fema.gov(maybe/somewhere)

"liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."

Sorry, this is why I retracted my previous question;

In layman's terms, the sulfur dioxide in acid form, reacted with the iron and this resulted in the 'eutectic' corrosion?

I apologize if I have misused any term or if it's basic chemistry; I am not feigning ignorance (sadly)...

[Pardalis]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Official Version Cover-up to be Successful

For some reason the Military aircargo arranged by the george bush regime to hit on 911 the WTC 7 was not able to reach the controlled demolition party area , therefore another excuse have to be found to explain the suspicious destruction of the WTC7 ..... FIRE


If the alleged CD of WTC 7 was such a problem, it begs the questions as to why they even attempted it.

I mean, the idea behind every conspiracy is to be inconspicuous, right? Why the unnecessary risk?

[ImANiceGuy]

If the alleged CD of WTC 7 was such a problem, it begs the questions as to why they even attempted it.

I mean, the idea behind every conspiracy is to be inconspicuous, right? Why the unnecessary risk?

What's worse, just asking questions, or just begging questions? jk...

Why no responses to post #33? I'm genuinely interested in a simplified explanation of the eutectic description...

[BigAl]

What's worse, just asking questions, or just begging questions? jk...

Why no responses to post #33? I'm genuinely interested in a simplified explanation of the eutectic description...


As a drastic simplification, eutectic reactions can occur at temps as low as room temperature and I suspect that under normal atmospheric conditions would no longer function in any normal fire.

Once light, termite only melts steel. The byproduct is iron and slag.

No welder or relevant scientist would confuse the results of thermite with steel subject to eutectic processes. A visual examination would be sufficient.

I welcome correction or elaboration.

[Thunder]

Why the Controlled Demolition Implosion of WTC 7
.

implosions do not sent debris outward. just sayin'.

:D

[sts75]

Im a truther, a british truther, see i dont know what the truth is about 911, thats why i call myself a truther as i would want to know, difference is i know i never will.
I know you 911 bigots who are either pro or anti official conspiracy theory never will know the truth of that day either in your lifetimes, no matter what word games you play with each other, nor the amount of insults traded, its just all so tacky and juvenile.

The bush regime influence over any inquiries, and their subsequent lack of funding, along with the strict protocols that the inquiries followed ensured we ALL will never know the truth in our lifetimes.

Ofcourse the worlds doubts could be put to rest for a few million dollars with a completely independent enquiry, will never happen.

Future historians will call this era of our existance a very dark and malevolent age as the struggle to secure dwindling natural resources took on many faces, as america focused its propoganda machine on the middle east once the cold war ended.

See the russians arent 2 headed zorgons that will rape and murder you yanks in your beds after all are they, as it turns out.
Theres a saying in britain about not starting to believe your own lies, because the rest of the world will not, they will just see it for what it was without the patriatism and whitewash enquiries afterwards.

[triforcharity]

Im a truther,.

This is really all you had to say really.

BTW, feel free to conduct your own investigation. You are more than welcome.

[sts75]

I am affraid truth has a different meaning in britain to the americanised version.

[Dave Rogers]

I am affraid truth has a different meaning in britain to the americanised version.

Even if it did, 'truther' conveys precisely the same message. A similar message is conveyed by poor spelling. If you want to be taken seriously, a good start would be learning to write clearly and coherently, with spelling mistakes becoming the exception rather than the rule. Otherwise, you're giving the impression of very poor attention to detail in your writing; what impression, do you think, does that give of your research skills?

Dave

[Orphia Nay]

Why the Demolition of WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Cover-up

The "demolition" is imaginary, thus no problem or cover-up exists.

Problem solved.

You're welcome.

[Bell]

Im <snip>

Oh my, is this going to be one of your social studies (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6022401#post6022401) again?

[dafydd]

Im a truther, a british truther, see i dont know what the truth is about 911, thats why i call myself a truther as i would want to know, difference is i know i never will.
I know you 911 bigots who are either pro or anti official conspiracy theory never will know the truth of that day either in your lifetimes, no matter what word games you play with each other, nor the amount of insults traded, its just all so tacky and juvenile.

The bush regime influence over any inquiries, and their subsequent lack of funding, along with the strict protocols that the inquiries followed ensured we ALL will never know the truth in our lifetimes.

Ofcourse the worlds doubts could be put to rest for a few million dollars with a completely independent enquiry, will never happen.

Future historians will call this era of our existance a very dark and malevolent age as the struggle to secure dwindling natural resources took on many faces, as america focused its propoganda machine on the middle east once the cold war ended.

See the russians arent 2 headed zorgons that will rape and murder you yanks in your beds after all are they, as it turns out.
Theres a saying in britain about not starting to believe your own lies, because the rest of the world will not, they will just see it for what it was without the patriatism and whitewash enquiries afterwards.

Oh dear,standards of education have fallen in the UK.

[Myriad]

Oh my, is this going to be one of your social studies (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6022401#post6022401) again?


I would advise anyone considering posting further in reply to sts75 to read the post Bell has linked to first. Or at least its first paragraph:

My interest was strictly as bait, it was attractive bait as the hooked are still frantically flapping about, trying to verbally unhook themselves with taunt after taunt.


(Note that I'm not speaking as a moderator here. Necessary to say that given the way the above is phrased.)

Respectfully,
Myriad

[sts75]

I am not baiting myriad, i have an opinion on 911 and i expressed it.
These discussions are not debates, they infact just debase this forum even further,
the last 3 years have seen this forum settle for this endless garbage that now passes for debate.

Thats not bait its opinion, you may not like my opinion, but i have to give it, ever wonder why the real investigative posters and company busters etc no longer bother with the place.
I say what i say out of sense of frustration with the now status quo, not to bait, the thread link makes my intention in that thread crystal clear right from the getgo.
Its no problem tho, as us europeans have known for many years that americans cannot take honest criticism, without mistaking it for a personal attack.

[Myriad]

My interest was strictly as bait, it was attractive bait as the hooked are still frantically flapping about, trying to verbally unhook themselves with taunt after taunt.


Respectfully,
Myriad

[sts75]

I see.
Stifle debate which you find unpalatable.
How predictable.

[djlunacee]

Im a truther, a british truther, see i dont know what the truth is about 911, thats why i call myself a truther as i would want to know, difference is i know i never will.
I know you 911 bigots who are either pro or anti official conspiracy theory never will know the truth of that day either in your lifetimes, no matter what word games you play with each other, nor the amount of insults traded, its just all so tacky and juvenile.

The bush regime influence over any inquiries, and their subsequent lack of funding, along with the strict protocols that the inquiries followed ensured we ALL will never know the truth in our lifetimes.

Ofcourse the worlds doubts could be put to rest for a few million dollars with a completely independent enquiry, will never happen.

Future historians will call this era of our existance a very dark and malevolent age as the struggle to secure dwindling natural resources took on many faces, as america focused its propoganda machine on the middle east once the cold war ended.

See the russians arent 2 headed zorgons that will rape and murder you yanks in your beds after all are they, as it turns out.
Theres a saying in britain about not starting to believe your own lies, because the rest of the world will not, they will just see it for what it was without the patriatism and whitewash enquiries afterwards.

Well bees knees chap, are you going to present evidence of this massive conspiracy? Please we are waiting...what part of loony do you fall in? No planer? DEW? MIHOP? Tell us please. You are accusing someone as being complicit in the mass murder of 3000 people, if that is your opinion, fine, so be it, you know what they say, don't you?

How about if I sit here and simply tell you that your gov't is no better than mine, they are complicit in the murder of 52 of your own in the 7/7 bombings??? Because frankly, its no different.

English, American doesn't matter, truth is truth, prove me wrong, I dare you to try.

[djlunacee]

I am not baiting myriad, i have an opinion on 911 and i expressed it.
These discussions are not debates, they infact just debase this forum even further,
the last 3 years have seen this forum settle for this endless garbage that now passes for debate.

Thats not bait its opinion, you may not like my opinion, but i have to give it, ever wonder why the real investigative posters and company busters etc no longer bother with the place.
I say what i say out of sense of frustration with the now status quo, not to bait, the thread link makes my intention in that thread crystal clear right from the getgo.
Its no problem tho, as us europeans have known for many years that americans cannot take honest criticism, without mistaking it for a personal attack.

Real investigators, do not let opinion get in the way of evidence, period, sorry chap, try again.
We have also been waiting for your kind to present this evidence of a massive conspiracy for 8 1/2 years, yet you still have none, not a shred.

[Macgyver1968]

Its no problem tho, as us europeans have known for many years that americans cannot take honest criticism, without mistaking it for a personal attack.

You do realize a good portion of the posters in this sub-forum are not American...right?

[sts75]

Well bees knees chap, are you going to present evidence of this massive conspiracy? Please we are waiting...what part of loony do you fall in? No planer? DEW? MIHOP? Tell us please. You are accusing someone as being complicit in the mass murder of 3000 people, if that is your opinion, fine, so be it, you know what they say, don't you?

How about if I sit here and simply tell you that your gov't is no better than mine, they are complicit in the murder of 52 of your own in the 7/7 bombings??? Because frankly, its no different.

English, American doesn't matter, truth is truth, prove me wrong, I dare you to try.

You obviously missed the first line in the quote you quoted, in you eagerness to crack one off..
this line below

Im a truther, a british truther, see i dont know what the truth is about 911, thats why i call myself a truther as i would want to know

As in know the truth, same as with 7/7.
As all both our countries populaces have been told are the governments theories, the most basic of whitewashes.
However atleast cameron is making the right noises about a fresh independent enquiry into 7/7, i will believe it, only when i see it.

[DGM]

I am not baiting myriad, i have an opinion on 911 and i expressed it.
These discussions are not debates, they infact just debase this forum even further,
the last 3 years have seen this forum settle for this endless garbage that now passes for debate.

Thats not bait its opinion, you may not like my opinion, but i have to give it, ever wonder why the real investigative posters and company busters etc no longer bother with the place.
I say what i say out of sense of frustration with the now status quo, not to bait, the thread link makes my intention in that thread crystal clear right from the getgo.
Its no problem tho, as us europeans have known for many years that americans cannot take honest criticism, without mistaking it for a personal attack.
You seem to imply there is a place where "truther" debate is actually happening. What do they have left to debate? After this long if you want to continue an argument you have to actually bring something to the table that is actually fact based, so far this is where the "truthers" are sorely lacking.

[Macgyver1968]

You obviously missed the first line in the quote you quoted, in you eagerness to crack one off..
this line below

Im a truther, a british truther, see i dont know what the truth is about 911, thats why i call myself a truther as i would want to know

As in know the truth, same as with 7/7.
As all both our countries populaces have been told are the governments theories.

So what exactly led you to believe that the "official story" is untrue? You claim that you don't know the truth..what sparked your suspicions?

[dafydd]

I see.
Stifle debate which you find unpalatable.
How predictable.

It will not be a debate unless you tell why you do not believe the official story,and also bring to the table your evidence.It's simple.

[sts75]

So what exactly led you to believe that the "official story" is untrue? You claim that you don't know the truth..what sparked your suspicions?

Thanks for the baitless/sarcasmless/ reply mac.
unless this is bait. . to believe that the "official story" is untrue


For me its a numbers game, i made my money as an independent bookmaker with 3 shops, the reason i tell you this is so as you will understand i have a good grasp of probabilities after 30 years of framing my own early prices.

Its not a case of thinking we've all been lied to, as we all know the inquiries were not 100% accurate, and were no more than whitewashes, there's many and varied reasons why these situations come about as history has proven, my instinct tells me that all the amazing apparent coincidences involved in both events are more than coincidence, i mean theres freak sets of data when you crunch stats etc etc, but i couldn't even begin to grasp the numbers involved in calculating all the freak coincidence odds of both 911 and 7/7.

[DGM]

It will not be a debate unless you tell why you do not believe the official story,and also bring to the table your evidence.It's simple.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/170744bfaf49c16490.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=20012)http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/170744bf6cae2c5dc1.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=19995)

[djlunacee]

You obviously missed the first line in the quote you quoted, in you eagerness to crack one off..
this line below

Im a truther, a british truther, see i dont know what the truth is about 911, thats why i call myself a truther as i would want to know

As in know the truth, same as with 7/7.
As all both our countries populaces have been told are the governments theories, the most basic of whitewashes.
However atleast cameron is making the right noises about a fresh independent enquiry into 7/7, i will believe it, only when i see it.

You obviously don't comprehend the english language to well, in your effort to stir the fires, in the first paragraph of the OP, you give your position of JAQing off because you don't know...however in the second you throw your jab at the bush administration accusing it of muddling the investigations, sorry good try. As far as independent inquiries plenty have been done, yet you ignore them, you ignore the videotaped confessions of the hijackers, all of the physical evidence, under the guise of JAQing off, I may be new to this forum, but have seen this a number of times.

So since you obviously do not believe the "official" version of 9/11, what seems to be giving you problems?

[djlunacee]

Thanks for the baitless/sarcasmless/ reply mac.
unless this is bait. . to believe that the "official story" is untrue


For me its a numbers game, i made my money as an independent bookmaker with 3 shops, the reason i tell you this is so as you will understand i have a good grasp of probabilities after 30 years of framing my own early prices.

Its not a case of thinking we've all been lied to, as we all know the inquiries were not 100% accurate, and were no more than whitewashes, there's many and varied reasons why these situations come about as history has proven, my instinct tells me that all the amazing apparent coincidences involved in both events are more than coincidence, i mean theres freak sets of data when you crunch stats etc etc, but i couldn't even begin to grasp the numbers involved in calculating all the freak coincidence odds of both 911 and 7/7.

The probabilities of someone winning the lottery are astronomical as well yet it happens. This is not evidence.

[sts75]

The probabilities of someone winning the lottery are astronomical as well yet it happens. This is not evidence.

Bet you were top of your class last year eh.

[DGM]

Bet you were top of your class last year eh.
So, do you actually have any factual evidence or are you just here to bait an argument? Your post seems to suggest the latter.

[sts75]

So, do you actually have any factual evidence or are you just here to bait an argument? Your post seems to suggest the latter.

baiting is what you people are attempting to do to me, lets not be under any illusions here, and at no point have i said or even implied i give a rats ass about whether you americans ever discover the truth.

I have said only that I WANT TO KNOW.

[djlunacee]

Bet you were top of your class last year eh.

No, I happen to crunch numbers for one of the largest financial institutions in the world, but back to the matter at hand, are you going to answer the questions posed to you or are you going to continue to sidestep them? There are many on this forum that will engage you in a discussion regarding the events of 9/11.

REPEAT:

What exactly do you have a problem with regarding the official story? Based on what evidence? (probability is not evidence)

[sts75]

No, I happen to crunch numbers for one of the largest financial institutions in the world, but back to the matter at hand, are you going to answer the questions posed to you or are you going to continue to sidestep them? There are many on this forum that will engage you in a discussion regarding the events of 9/11.

REPEAT:

What exactly do you have a problem with regarding the official story? Based on what evidence? (probability is not evidence)

bolded,
I am bowled over i am that impressed.

You do not get to pose questions to me in full expectation of a reply, if you wantonly create the scenario of that question.

Ive already posted my concerns if you missed them i suggest you re-read/crunch the thread.

Oh and the visual impression that 7 going down leaves on one, is quite frankly all anyone needs to see to know the days events are not as they have been described, hence why i clicked on this one and only 911 thread ive visited since ive been here.
You can argue amongst yourselves about it until doomsday all you like, bothers me not, my eyes tell me all i need to know, that will be because patriatism is not blinding me.

[djlunacee]

It is a basic question, your avoidance of the issue is noted, as you have stated nothing as to what you want to know, except for the truth, which forces the question yet again, I will just word it different so you can understand.

What part, specifically, of the official story do you consider to be a lie??? Based on what evidence??

You see, I am not the only one asking, several other members of the forum have also asked, and your pitiful attempts at sarcasm to deflect the question are also noted.

I would have to say the probability to us getting an answer this time, are slim and none, and slim is out sick today.

[dafydd]

baiting is what you people are attempting to do to me, lets not be under any illusions here, and at no point have i said or even implied i give a rats ass about whether you americans ever discover the truth.

I have said only that I WANT TO KNOW.

I am not an American.

[dafydd]

Thanks for the baitless/sarcasmless/ reply mac.
unless this is bait. . to believe that the "official story" is untrue


For me its a numbers game, i made my money as an independent bookmaker with 3 shops, the reason i tell you this is so as you will understand i have a good grasp of probabilities after 30 years of framing my own early prices.

Its not a case of thinking we've all been lied to, as we all know the inquiries were not 100% accurate, and were no more than whitewashes, there's many and varied reasons why these situations come about as history has proven, my instinct tells me that all the amazing apparent coincidences involved in both events are more than coincidence, i mean theres freak sets of data when you crunch stats etc etc, but i couldn't even begin to grasp the numbers involved in calculating all the freak coincidence odds of both 911 and 7/7.

I was a bookmaker once upon a time.Calculating the winnings on a bet is not the same as calculating the physics of a falling building.Do you have any engineering qualifications?Which part of the official story don't you believe.Are you going to tell us or have you just come here for a bit of aggro? You are not the first delusionaut that we've had here and you won't be the last.We've heard all the rants before. Yawn.

[dafydd]

bolded,
I am bowled over i am that impressed.

You do not get to pose questions to me in full expectation of a reply, if you wantonly create the scenario of that question.

Ive already posted my concerns if you missed them i suggest you re-read/crunch the thread.

Oh and the visual impression that 7 going down leaves on one, is quite frankly all anyone needs to see to know the days events are not as they have been described, hence why i clicked on this one and only 911 thread ive visited since ive been here.
You can argue amongst yourselves about it until doomsday all you like, bothers me not, my eyes tell me all i need to know, that will be because patriatism is not blinding me.

Patriotism.

[sts75]

It is a basic question, your avoidance of the issue is noted, as you have stated nothing as to what you want to know, except for the truth, which forces the question yet again, I will just word it different so you can understand.

What part, specifically, of the official story do you consider to be a lie??? Based on what evidence??

You see, I am not the only one asking, several other members of the forum have also asked, and your pitiful attempts at sarcasm to deflect the question are also noted.

I would have to say the probability to us getting an answer this time, are slim and none, and slim is out sick today.

What i want to see is as stated already, a true independent equiry in both 7/7 and 911, i am not interested in the conclusions of a bunch of google kids whose sole aim of posting is entertainment.

Why would anyone else NOT want the same thing, if all is as should be, then
theres nothing for the ex administrations of blair and bush to worry about is there.

[dafydd]

What i want to see is as stated already, a true independent equiry in both 7/7 and 911, i am not interested in the conclusions of a bunch of google kids whose sole aim of posting is entertainment.

Why would anyone else NOT want the same thing, if all is as should be, then
theres nothing for the ex administrations of blair and bush to worry about is there.

Google kids? What on earth are you rabbiting about?

[sts75]

Patriotism.

Well you should know, you've subtly indoctrinated your whole life with it.

[dafydd]

What i want to see is as stated already, a true independent equiry in both 7/7 and 911, i am not interested in the conclusions of a bunch of google kids whose sole aim of posting is entertainment.

Why would anyone else NOT want the same thing, if all is as should be, then
theres nothing for the ex administrations of blair and bush to worry about is there.

It may have escaped your notice but there have been independant enquiries into the said events.

[dafydd]

Well you should know, you've subtly indoctrinated your whole life with it.

Oh really,how do you know that?You know nothing about me.You have no evidence of a conspiracy,nothing, so all you can do is resort to calumny.Typical looney truther behaviour. Do you have anything grown-up to add to the discussion?

[sts75]

Not independent enough for me.

so whats next ??

Let me guess semantics ??

[dafydd]

A fair question,Google kids. You do know that there are scientists and other people with qualifications here,don't you? What part of your engineering training has led you to disbelieving the official story?There,are those questions inane enough for you?

[djlunacee]

Not independent enough for me.

so whats next ??

Let me guess semantics ??

So who should conduct the investigation? How will it be funded? How do you feel the results would differ? The physical evidence is still the same, the events of the day are still the same. I mean seriously, If experts in all relevant fields are not good enough for you who will be?

Talk about wash, rinse, repeat....

[dafydd]

What can you not face debate on how visually stunning 7 going down was then.

You really love your handwaving look at me postings dont you.

No,I just want to hear your theory about what happened on 9/11. It's a funny thing but not one truther has ever given me an answer to that question. I wonder why?

[dafydd]

Because they wouldnt dribble the ***** that now passes for content all over this forum.

Give us some content then,what happened on 9/11?

[dafydd]

I dont believe you because they wouldnt dribble the ***** that now passes for content all over this forum.
They may have come here, they certainly havent stayed.

Omniscience as well now.Is there no end to these truther's abilities?

[djlunacee]

No,I just want to hear your theory about what happened on 9/11. It's a funny thing but not one truther has ever given me an answer to that question. I wonder why?

Because if they had to piece together all of their garbage, the light bulb would go off and they would realize, its just garbage, and then all that would be left is the official story, just sayin'.

[sts75]

So who should conduct the investigation? How will it be funded? How do you feel the results would differ? The physical evidence is still the same, the events of the day are still the same. I mean seriously, If experts in all relevant fields are not good enough for you who will be?

Talk about wash, rinse, repeat....

I see no need then, while spoil your internet fun.
I mean your right what could a truely independent inquiry WITH supoena powers find anyway.

Silly old me.

[dafydd]

I see no need then, while spoil your internet fun.
I mean your right what could a truely independent inquiry WITH supoena powers find anyway.

Silly old me.

Who would conduct it? Some one the truthers trust? David Icke?

[dafydd]

I see no need then, while spoil your internet fun.
I mean your right what could a truely independent inquiry WITH supoena powers find anyway.

Silly old me.

They would find that some terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into buildings.

[djlunacee]

I see no need then, while spoil your internet fun.
I mean your right what could a truely independent inquiry WITH supoena powers find anyway.

Silly old me.

Address the questions.

[sts75]

Address the questions.

you dont get to bully me.
i have said anything and all about 911 and 7/7 in my postings to the thread.
anything you are asking you can answer yourself by reading it.

So no you are not getting a reply to your slanted irrelevent questions as they are nothing more than an attempt to embroil me in forum sematics.

[djlunacee]

The same could be said for you.

YOU want an independent investigation, to satisfy whatever it is YOU have problems with in the official story. WHO would satisfy YOUR standards of independent? How is this investigation to be funded? How do YOU think the results would differ?

These questions are not slanted in anyway, they are simple, and direct and necessary, before what YOU want can be done.

[Bell]

you dont get to bully me.
i have said anything and all about 911 and 7/7 in my postings to the thread.
anything you are asking you can answer yourself by reading it.

So no you are not getting a reply to your slanted irrelevent questions as they are nothing more than an attempt to embroil me in forum sematics.

Hey sts75, how are things going with your renaissance UFO's?

[djlunacee]

you dont get to bully me.
i have said anything and all about 911 and 7/7 in my postings to the thread.
anything you are asking you can answer yourself by reading it.

So no you are not getting a reply to your slanted irrelevent questions as they are nothing more than an attempt to embroil me in forum sematics.

Typical.

YOU: I want a new independent investigation into 9/11 because I don't believe
the old one!

ME: Who would you have run it to satisfy you? How would it be funded?

YOU: You're bullying me, I have said all I have to say.



Nice.

[Bell]

Typical.

YOU: I want a new independent investigation into 9/11 because I don't believe
the old one!

ME: Who would you have run it to satisfy you? How would it be funded?

YOU: You're bullying me, I have said all I have to say.



Nice.

sts75 is a troll.

[djlunacee]

sts75 is a troll.

I second that, but I suppose that we will need an independent investigation into that claim, as well.

[sts75]

The same could be said for you.

YOU want an independent investigation, to satisfy whatever it is YOU have problems with in the official story. WHO would satisfy YOUR standards of independent? How is this investigation to be funded? How do YOU think the results would differ?

These questions are not slanted in anyway, they are simple, and direct and necessary, before what YOU want can be done.

My opinions will not change one thing, and so i see no point in expressing any more than i already have.
Your attempts to put words in my mouth and embroil me in inane to and throw will prove friutless.

[Bell]

I second that, but I suppose that we will need an independent investigation into that claim, as well.

Done (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=177910).

[djlunacee]

My opinions will not change one thing, and so i see no point in expressing any more than i already have.

You never expressed anything in the first place. If you had the discussion would not have stalled due to your unwillingness to engage. The questions I posed were relevant, it is how an investigation gets started.

[djlunacee]

More handwaving look at me drama queen posting.

Truth hurts doesn't it?

[djlunacee]

Yes i did you just couldnt be bothered reading that far back.
Your only interest was in engaging me in TRASH talk.

The only thing you have stated is that you want a new investigation, based on probabilities, period, nothing of substance, perhaps you should read the thread, try again.

[dafydd]

Dont you just lovethese sock-puppet accounts.

Very very noticable that the only statement and claim i made about 911 has been totally ignored Whilst you all persisted in cracking a few of the wrist.

Totally ignored, why, because what i said about 7 is undeniable.

What did you say about it?

[DGM]

baiting is what you people are attempting to do to me, lets not be under any illusions here, and at no point have i said or even implied i give a rats ass about whether you americans ever discover the truth.

I have said only that I WANT TO KNOW.
So why are you here? If you don't care to know the truth (or want to find out) then all your doing is wasting your (and everyones) time. Are you that bored (or lonely)? If you base your whole opinion of 9/11 on fact-less (as supported by the fact you refuse to post any) speculation this is the only conclusion I can conceive.

[sts75]

The only thing you have stated is that you want a new investigation, based on probabilities, period, nothing of substance, perhaps you should read the thread, try again.


I have also expressed 3 times how visually impressive 7 was going down, you must have accidentally missed all 3 postings.
Thats what the rest of the world sees, a building being demolished.
All the internet semantics will not change that fact.

[djlunacee]

I wouldnt know ive never met a truthful american, have you??.
And my instinct tells me the truth about 911 would hurt you very much.

Everyday I look at one in the mirror. Now, if you have nothing to add to the discussion as to why you feel the official story is untrue and as to why you feel this way, you have become irrelevant to this thread.

Instinct? Really, you can't even answer basic questions about whether or not your instinct would be confirmed.

My instinct tells me your arrogance is simply a cover for your ignorance.

[dafydd]

I have also expressed 3 times how visually impressive 7 was going down, you must have accidentally missed all 3 postings.
Thats what the rest of the world sees, a building being demolished.
All the internet semantics will not change that fact.

Visually impressive,so what?All the evidence in the world will not change your fantasy.

[sts75]

So why are you here? If you don't care to know the truth (or want to find out) then all your doing is wasting your (and everyones) time. Are you that bored (or lonely)? If you base your whole opinion of 9/11 on fact-less (as supported by the fact you refuse to post any) speculation this is the only conclusion I can conceive.

The demolition of 7 is not factless, unless ofcourse it didnt end up in a heap.
Patriotism isnt blinding the rest of the world to what their eyes witnessed, and no amount of american government spin will alter that.
What i couldnt careless about is how many of you have been pre-programmed by your indoctrinated patriotism to never doubt officialdom.
Its so overtly obvious, to non yanks, it is that simple.
If there was nothing to fear from a new genuinely independent enquiry i am sure it would be embraced, if for no other reason than distraction from your current financial woes.

[dafydd]

My instinct tells me your arrogance is simply a cover for your ignorance.

Well said,we are dealing with a chav here.Nothing of interest,move on.

[djlunacee]

I have also expressed 3 times how visually impressive 7 was going down, you must have accidentally missed all 3 postings.
Thats what the rest of the world sees, a building being demolished.
All the internet semantics will not change that fact.

oh it was impressive a building collapses, that was impressive, we need a new investigation!!!
BASED ON WHAT?????

[dafydd]

The demolition of 7 is not factless, unless ofcourse it didnt end up in a heap.

And we know why it ended up in a heap,and explosives had nothing to do with it.I'm out now,you are just here to blow hot air.

[DGM]

The demolition of 7 is not factless, unless ofcourse it didnt end up in a heap.
You are correct, The building did in fact collapse. Can I assume then you have no interest in the "controlled demolition" fantasy as (weakly) described by the "truth" movement, (because that is in fact fact-less)?

patriotism isnt blinding the rest of the world to what their eyes witnessed, and no amount of american government spin will alter that.
What i couldnt careless about is how many of you have been pre-programmed by your indoctrinated patriotism to never doubt officialdom.
Its so overtly obvious, to non yanks, it is that simple.


Your "spin" rant is without factual backing. Try again.

[djlunacee]

The demolition of 7 is not factless, unless ofcourse it didnt end up in a heap.
patriotism isnt blinding the rest of the world to what their eyes witnessed, and no amount of american government spin will alter that.
What i couldnt careless about is how many of you have been pre-programmed by your indoctranated patriotism to never doubt officialdom..

Good, that's a start, now the next step is to present your evidence.

[sts75]

Visually impressive,so what?All the evidence in the world will not change your fantasy.

So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to.

[sts75]

Good, that's a start, now the next step is to present your evidence.

You want my eyes now right.?

[Bell]

So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to.

You just answered your own question. Doy!

[dafydd]

Good, that's a start, now the next step is to present your evidence.

Lol,some hope.

[DGM]

You want my eyes now right.?
So you have no (technical) real reason to doubt the "official" explanation for the collapse of WTC 7?

[dafydd]

I am really out now,I can see where this is going,again.

[dafydd]

So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to.

You are speaking for the rest of the world? The majority of us,the sane ones know it was not a CD. I really am out now,we've been through it all before. Boring.

[djlunacee]

So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to.

Sorry, first, you must understand, you are the minority. Second, the burden of proof is on you to show it was a controlled demolition. Going to be hard to prove since there is no evidence to the sort, and no since you are not an expert in the field in which you are claiming, your eyes will not do. so again present your scientific evidence of controlled demolition of building 7.

[djlunacee]

all these pointless answers achieve is to show just how baseless you all actually are, nothing comes out of any of you thats even remotely informative, or even fresh, same old stale tired metaphors and handwaving trash talk.




That is the "truth" movement in a nutshell.

[djlunacee]

So you have no (technical) real reason to doubt the "official" explanation for the collapse of WTC 7?

Nope. None. Not even an attempt.

[Bell]

:cool:

[sts75]

Sorry, first, you must understand, you are the minority. Second, the burden of proof is on you to show it was a controlled demolition. Going to be hard to prove since there is no evidence to the sort, and no since you are not an expert in the field in which you are claiming, your eyes will not do. so again present your scientific evidence of controlled demolition of building 7.

You will need a tall pole to run that bs flag up.

You have a wonderful imagination, very child like.
First of all i only need my eyes and instinct, i unlike you dont need to prove anything to anyone, i only need to satify myself as to the merits of the explanations we have had.

And the fact you think the rest of the world is the minority to half the people of america, then it just shows the other 7.1 billion people how you americans view your world.
Even half your own country dont believe your own governments version and march in the streets about it, so why should anyone else, especially when they see 7 going down like it does.

[djlunacee]

You will need a tall pole to run that bs flag up.

You have a wonderful imagination, very child like.
First of all i only need my eyes and instinct, i unlike you dont need to prove anything to anyone, i only need to satify myself as to the merits of the explanations we have had.

And the fact you think the rest of the world is the minority to half the people of america, then it just shows the other 7.1 billion people how you americans view your world.
Even half your own country dont believe your own governments version and march in the streets about it, so why should anyone else, especially when they see 7 going down like it does.

Wrong again, and if all you need are your eyes and instinct, then why are you here? If science means nothing to you, you have really come to the wrong place. You do have to provide proof of your claims that the U.S. government, and all agencies involved in the consequent investigation, and clean up are complicit in a conspiracy to commit the mass murder of 3000 people on September 11th, 2001. It is the law. Before you go running off at the mouth again, I will have you take note that there are regular posters on this forum that were there. I personally know several people who worked the pile of rubble during the clean up. So, again present your scientific evidence of CD.

[sts75]

Wrong again, and if all you need are your eyes and instinct, then why are you here? If science means nothing to you, you have really come to the wrong place. You do have to provide proof of your claims that the U.S. government, and all agencies involved in the consequent investigation, and clean up are complicit in a conspiracy to commit the mass murder of 3000 people on September 11th, 2001. It is the law. Before you go running off at the mouth again, I will have you take note that there are regular posters on this forum that were there. I personally know several people who worked the pile of rubble during the clean up. So, again present your scientific evidence of CD.

Ive bolded for you a perfect example of running off at the mouth.

I am not interested in your american flag waving sentimental inverted patriotism either about the first responders etc.

The science has to come from totally independent sources, not a hand picked administration friendly panel for me to have confidence in their findings.

[djlunacee]

Ive bolded for you a perfect example of running off at the mouth.

I am not interested in your american flag waving sentimental inverted patriotism either about the first responders etc.

The science has to come from totally independent sources, not a hand picked administration friendly panel for me to have confidence in their findings.

Well right back to where we started WHO???? Can't take a fact? It is what it is, you are making a claim, now prove it. It is not up to me to do the work for you.

[sts75]

I see your problem, you just plain do not want to get past the fact i make no claims at all in the sense that you are trying to instigate, i have given my opinion on what it looked like{7 going down}, and it looks to me and many millions more non american, aswell as millions of americans like a controlled demoltion of b/7.

You can throw your hands up in the air name calling or throwing government backed panel scientific papers around all you want, they aint worth wiping your backside on, because of the percieved bias in their production, no amount of theatrical hand waving will ever get you past that point, that is why in your own country more and more people are doubting, year in year out the number grows, how long until 200 million are asking for a new enquiry instead of the 100 plus million now.

They could stop it all simply, with a genuinely independent panel with supoena powers, it is that simple, so simple one really does have to seriously doubt your administrations integrity for repeated refusals to do so.

[kookbreaker]

I see your problem, you just plain do not want to get past the fact i make no claims at all in the sense that you are trying to instigate, i have given my opinion on what it looked like{7 going down}, and it looks to me and many millions more non american, aswell as millions of americans like a controlled demoltion of b/7.


Do you realize this is one sentence?


You can throw your hands up in the air name calling or throwing government backed panel scientific papers around all you want, they aint worth wiping your backside on, because of the percieved bias in their production, no amount of theatrical hand waving will ever get you past that point, that is why in your own country more and more people are doubting, year in year out the number grows, how long until 200 million are asking for a new enquiry instead of the 100 plus million now.


Do you realize this is one sentence?

Seriously, you talk about your opinions as if they matter when you write like someone who hasn't even taken a basic English course.

[sts75]

How original.

[sheeplesnshills]

I am affraid truth has a different meaning in britain to the americanised version.

I'm a Brit too.....and it only means different things to the the Truthers. They come up with a "truth" then try to massage the facts to fit. To date without any success at all.

[Macgyver1968]

Thanks for the baitless/sarcasmless/ reply mac.
unless this is bait. . to believe that the "official story" is untrue

You're welcome...let's try to keep it civil.


For me its a numbers game, i made my money as an independent bookmaker with 3 shops, the reason i tell you this is so as you will understand i have a good grasp of probabilities after 30 years of framing my own early prices.


So who do you like in the World Cup? :) (just kidding) Understanding probabilities is great...but do not explain everything. Since you mentioned WTC7, which do you think is more probable?

1. A 110 story flaming building collapsed next to it, damaging it, and started fires across many floors that were not fought and burned for 7 hours. Long-span columns eventually failed causing the collapse of the building.

or

2. A secret cabal in the US government conspired to destroy a building that no one had heard of....Dispatched covert teams to install demolition charges all over the building. Then waited 7 hours after the building was evacuated..and after fire ravaged the building...subjecting their charges to lord only knows how much heat...only then deciding to blow the charges that no one heard. Killing no one, and making no real impact on the American psyche. What was the point?

Which seem more probable?


Its not a case of thinking we've all been lied to, as we all know the inquiries were not 100% accurate, and were no more than whitewashes, there's many and varied reasons why these situations come about as history has proven, my instinct tells me that all the amazing apparent coincidences involved in both events are more than coincidence, i mean theres freak sets of data when you crunch stats etc etc, but i couldn't even begin to grasp the numbers involved in calculating all the freak coincidence odds of both 911 and 7/7.

You're really generalizing here...much as you have generalized about Americans. Nothing humans do is 100% accurate, but that doesn't prove it was a 'whitewash'. I'm not sure what you mean by "freak" sets of data. There were a lot of unprecedented events that occurred on 9/11. You mention crunching numbers...what numbers are we talking about? It seems you are basing your beliefs on instinct and not science. Gut feelings will only take you so far...you have to actually look at the science to understand something completly.

[sheeplesnshills]

i have given my opinion on what it looked like{7 going down}, and it looks to me and many millions more non american, aswell as millions of americans like a controlled demoltion of b/7.

Looking like and being are two diiferent things. Write a technical paper showing why it has to be a CD and get said published in a reuputable relevent journal.Then we can talk.
They could stop it all simply, with a genuinely independent panel with supoena powers, it is that simple, so simple one really does have to seriously doubt your administrations integrity for repeated refusals to do so.
[/QUOTE]

Stop what? Investigate what? Why would anyone spend millions on a new investigation when there is nothing to investigate? The is no scientific basis for it.

[kookbreaker]

How original.

I'll take accuracy over originality when it comes to 9/11, thank you.

[sts75]

You're welcome...let's try to keep it civil.



So who do you like in the World Cup? :) (just kidding) Understanding probabilities is great...but do not explain everything. Since you mentioned WTC7, which do you think is more probable?

1. A 110 story flaming building collapsed next to it, damaging it, and started fires across many floors that were not fought and burned for 7 hours. Long-span columns eventually failed causing the collapse of the building.

or

2. A secret cabal in the US government conspired to destroy a building that no one had heard of....Dispatched covert teams to install demolition charges all over the building. Then waited 7 hours after the building was evacuated..and after fire ravaged the building...subjecting their charges to lord only knows how much heat...only then deciding to blow the charges that no one heard. Killing no one, and making no real impact on the American psyche. What was the point?

Which seem more probable?



You're really generalizing here...much as you have generalized about Americans. Nothing humans do is 100% accurate, but that doesn't prove it was a 'whitewash'. I'm not sure what you mean by "freak" sets of data. There were a lot of unprecedented events that occurred on 9/11. You mention crunching numbers...what numbers are we talking about? It seems you are basing your beliefs on instinct and not science. Gut feelings will only take you so far...you have to actually look at the science to understand something completly.

Why should i pick any options, am i on trial for having a personal view/impression that 911 left on me.
They are solely posed as entrapment.
As your second paragraph clearly shows your understanding of the situation.

[sts75]

I'll take accuracy over originality when it comes to 9/11, thank you.

Shame the other 160 million americans you share your country with dont share your opinion, when youve convinced them, then try and convince me.

[sts75]

Looking like and being are two diiferent things. Write a technical paper showing why it has to be a CD and get said published in a reuputable relevent journal.Then we can talk.



Stop what? Investigate what? Why would anyone spend millions on a new investigation when there is nothing to investigate? The is no scientific basis for it.

If there are no doubts then why do americans march in the streets demanding a new independent enquiry.

[djlunacee]

Shame the other 160 million americans you share your country with dont share your opinion, when youve convinced them, then try and convince me.

prove it. prove to me that 160 million Americans believe it was an inside job.

[sts75]

prove it. prove to me that 160 million Americans believe it was an inside job.
I cannot.

160 million is a pretty specific amount/number, can you honestly deny that millions upon millions of americans do not believe the official story.

And how many posts do you intend for the semantics to go on for please.

Edit for clarification and future reference, you added the words inside job, i said had not been told the truth.

[TexasJack]

If there are no doubts then why do americans march in the streets demanding a new independent enquiry.

This a great point, check out the hundreds of thousands at this enormous truther march:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://zombietime.com/9-11_truth_march_power_to_peaceful/IMG_5600.JPG&imgrefurl=http://zombietime.com/9-11_truth_march_power_to_peaceful/&usg=__0N9ePQ44haiWmSc2Y5A7EIEL1uU=&h=522&w=720&sz=69&hl=en&start=1&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=Lv6yPWzVbzmeLM:&tbnh=102&tbnw=140&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtruther%2Bmarch%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26 sa%3DN%26tbs%3Disch:1

What do you shills have to say now?

[kookbreaker]

I cannot.


Exactly.

[Macgyver1968]

Why should i pick any options, am i on trial for having a personal view/impression that 911 left on me. They are solely posed as entrapment.

No..you're not on trial. You claimed to have expertise in probabilities, I just asked you which was more probable. Apparently you don't wish to answer...that's you're prerogative. Clearly, you have not come here to discuss the events of 9/11, but just wish to vent.


As your second paragraph clearly shows your understanding of the situation.

Yes...it clearly shows that I understand you don't wish to discuss anything, that you make broad generalizations about entire countries of people, and pull statistics out of your ass, and have a persecution complex. Have a nice stay....I imagine it won't be a long one.

[DGM]

If there are no doubts then why do americans march in the streets demanding a new independent enquiry.
They don't. Does this mean your whole argument is without warrant? I think so.

[sts75]

Yes i have seen hundreds if not thousands of them not doing it on the news.

[djlunacee]

I cannot.

160 million is a pretty specific amount/number, can you honestly deny that millions upon millions of americans do not believe the official story.

And how many posts do you intend for the semantics to go on for please.

And for clarification and future reference, you added the words inside job, i said had not been told the truth.

you claimed the number(evidence post 131 of this thread), or is that just your instinct? Yes, I can honestly deny that the number of americans you claim to not believe in the official story is untrue, inaccurate, and a down right lie.

Your constant dodging of simple relevant questions and inability to discuss the issues you question makes you an arrogant fool.


How is that for semantics?

[DGM]

Yes i have seen hundreds if not thousands of them not doing it on the news.
When? I live here and I have seen exactly one "truther" (I live just outside one of the most liberal cities in the country) in the "wild". The only time I saw more then one at the same time is when I went to see Gage speak in Cambridge (I went to them). Cambridge happens to be the hot bed for all that is wacky and despite a street festival with thousands just outside he drew 80 people (all of which I think were true believers to begin with).

[kookbreaker]

Mind the premature exitation.
When i come across one handed typers like you on my travels i cannot help but wonder how much better the world would be if you applied your full attention to either one thing or the other..

You really are not every good at this, are you?

[sts75]

you claimed the number(evidence post 131 of this thread), or is that just your instinct? Yes, I can honestly deny that the number of americans you claim to not believe in the official story is untrue, inaccurate, and a down right lie.

Your constant dodging of simple relevant questions and inability to discuss the issues you question makes you an arrogant fool.


How is that for semantics?

Your confusing semantics with a personal attack.

[kookbreaker]

Your confusing semantics with a personal attack.

Claiming 160 million think like you (or at least disagree with us) and then being called on it is not 'semantics'. It is pointing out your intellectual dishonesty and sloppiness.

[sts75]

When? I live here and I have seen exactly one "truther" (I live just outside one of the most liberal cities in the country) in the "wild". The only time I saw more then one at the same time is when I went to see Gage speak in Cambridge (I went to them). Cambridge happens to be the hot bed for all that is wacky and despite a street festival with thousands just outside he drew 80 people (all of which I think were true believers to begin with).

Are you simply being wilfully ignorant, or do you genuinely believe i was talking about the streets of britain, just show how there could be any confusion.

[djlunacee]

Your confusing semantics with a personal attack.

and you are confusing opinion as evidence.

[Thunder]

If there are no doubts then why do americans march in the streets demanding a new independent enquiry.

Fact: active Truthers make up about .001% of the USA. that's around 3,300 people.

how many Americans may entertain the idea that maybe 9-11 had elements of an inside job? obviously more. but they don't really care about these issues, so they are of little consequence.

I personally think its possible that maybe there was a conspiracy with the JFK and MLK assassinations.

but am I gonna go march about it or donate money or write letters? **** no. why not? cause I couldn't give a ****. :)

Just like how most Americans don't give a **** about 9-11 truth ideas.

[kookbreaker]

Your a card aint ya.

Is that really the best you can do?

You really are not very good at this, are you?

[kookbreaker]

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE round and round and round and round.

You think that your confusing opinion with evidence is not a problem?

[sts75]

Fact: active Truthers make up about .001% of the USA. that's around 3,300 people.

how many Americans may entertain the idea that maybe 9-11 had elements of an inside job? obviously more. but they don't really care about these issues, so they are of little consequence.

If its a fact then you wont have a problem proving it will you, without proof its just an assertion, I.E. MORE JABBER.

[DGM]

Are you simply being wilfully ignorant, or do you genuinely believe i was talking about the streets of britain, just show how there could be any confusion.
I'm not confused at all. Can you show me any event the "truthers" have had that drew any more then a handful and received any kind of media attention? That was your claim, was it not?

[sts75]

I said i have seen truth movement marches in america on the tv news, i have simple.
If you havent, how am i responsible for that.

[djlunacee]

If its a fact then you wont have a problem proving it will you, without proof its just an assertion, I.E. MORE JABBER.

Well I'll be damned. The Irony is almost overwhelming.

[sts75]

I am overwhelmed you have a sense of irony.

What do goerges mates scientific reports say about 7 collapsing in on itself so impressively, or wasn't 7 in their brief.
Convince me, thats your job isnt it.

[ElMondoHummus]

Folks, everyone should just ignore sts75 here. He's managed to troll with absolutely zero substance, and he's not even posting anything worthy of a reply.

If he wants to start discussing the particulars, well maybe then there'll be something to reply to. But at this time, everyone's pretty much biting on an empty hook. We all should just let him fade away. He's got nothing to contribute and is only posting to get rises out of people. That's not worthy of any of us here.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Shame the other 160 million americans you share your country with [...]


There are over 300 million U.S. citizens, not 160 million.

[djlunacee]

Agreed.

[dafydd]

Folks, everyone should just ignore sts75 here. He's managed to troll with absolutely zero substance, and he's not even posting anything worthy of a reply.

If he wants to start discussing the particulars, well maybe then there'll be something to reply to. But at this time, everyone's pretty much biting on an empty hook. We all should just let him fade away. He's got nothing to contribute and is only posting to get rises out of people. That's not worthy of any of us here.

I agree,he/she is not worth responding to.My bet is on a ban soon.

[sts75]

There are over 300 million U.S. citizens, not 160 million.
I know and half of them believe theyve been lied to, if you believe the european press.
False accusations of trolling will just fall on deaf ears.
If as i have read half your countries populace do not believe your government then why would you believe that the majority of the other 7 billion people in the world would.

Its quite simple if you cannot convince your own, then why all the outraged indignation towards me for not being convinced.
Do you fully understand or comprehend the power of those pictures of 7 going down the way it did.

[djlunacee]

Huh? Shhhh.....Sorry, thought I heard something.

[tsig]

I have also expressed 3 times how visually impressive 7 was going down, you must have accidentally missed all 3 postings.
Thats what the rest of the world sees, a building being demolished.
All the internet semantics will not change that fact.

Could you post a link to a CD that looks anything like 7?

[triforcharity]

What i want to see is as stated already, a true independent equiry in both 7/7 and 911, i am not interested in the conclusions of a bunch of google kids whose sole aim of posting is entertainment.

Why would anyone else NOT want the same thing, if all is as should be, then
theres nothing for the ex administrations of blair and bush to worry about is there.

Feel free. Pay for it, conduct it, and publish it. I'll wait.

[Thunder]

If you do have the data then post it.

which is EXACTLY what I am asking from you.

where is the link to the poll? don't make claims if you REFUSE to back them up.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

The point is the majority of people on the planet do believe that we were lied to and a cover up and whitewash took place.


The evidence you've provided does not support this assertion.

[sts75]

The evidence you've provided does not support this assertion.

Well it must be wrong then, or maybe the press i read are all truthers out to damage america.
The people i live amongst all american haters etc etc.
For most express reservations when asked about their thoughts on 911.
You will just have to face facts, the world is not a place that has much patience for american foriegn policy, its their governments that do business with them, not the populaces, they see the results of american foriegn policy all over the news as you bring democracy to oil rich nations, who were quite happy living without your quarter of a million delivery boys on their doorsteps.
7 went down as a direct result of that foriegn policy, and to further legitimise subsequent foriegn policy.
The who and why is what most people want to know, and they want it from a legit source.

[TokenMac]

Well it must be wrong then, or maybe the press i read are all truthers out to damage america.
The people i live amongst all american haters etc etc.
For most express reservations when asked.

No just the evidence you've provided doesn't support your assertion.

[triforcharity]

So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to.

Here is a study from Canada about steel framed buildings versus Concrete framed buildings.

http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty_projects/terri/images/course_pdf/172-ch8.pdf

Here is a case study from the UK.
http://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/1842/886/1/326_Jowsey.pdf

They agree that fire+steel-firefighting effots=collapse.

Those are just two of MANY that deal with steel framed structure collapses due to fire ALONE.

[triforcharity]

Even half your own country dont believe your own governments version and march in the streets about it, so why should anyone else, especially when they see 7 going down like it does.

Oh. My. God. You don't actually believe that do you? Come one, seriously? Have you seen their marches? Last year in NYC, a city of 8 MILLION, that had a hard time finding 200 to march, let ALONE 4 million.

More people are staging protests about immigration laws and oil spills than the events of 9/11.

But, maybe if you had some evidence....

[Thunder]

so, because WTC 7 sorta kinda looked like a CD (without the booms and bangs and flashes of exploding charges), we are to just assume it was a CD.

fascinating stuff.

the sun appears to revolve around the Earth. but we know it doesn't.

[Thunder]

Even half your own country dont believe your own governments version and march in the streets about it, so why should anyone else, especially when they see 7 going down like it does.

I marched in two anti-Iraq war marches. one in NYC in early 2004...the second in DC of June 2004.

there were tens of thousands of people there.

9-11 Truther marches....have never...ever...looked anything like this.

half of the USA thinks 9-11 was an inside job? half of the USA marches in support of 9-11 Truth?

wow. just wow. where do you get such ideas?

[triforcharity]

Shame the other 160 million americans you share your country with dont share your opinion, when youve convinced them, then try and convince me.

They tried this in NYC. A city of 8 MIILLION people. They had a hard time getting 40,000 signatures!! Google NYCCAN and fail.

[Thunder]

7 went down as a direct result of that foriegn policy, and to further legitimise subsequent foriegn policy.

prove it.

oh...sorry...I forgot. you don't have to. you saw it with your own eyes.

[TexasJack]

What you think is irrelevent whether it would or would not surprise you.
If you dont know, then dont comment.
If you do have the data then post it.

I can express my opinion any way I choose. Are you a moderator on this forum? The data that is posted suggests a downward trend in Bush be involved. You have any data to suggest an upward trend? Or am I jumping ahead of myself, do you even understand the data this has been provided?

[Macgyver1968]

Cause, you know, that shole supeona thing is the KEY to getting the TRUTH!!
:D:D

This is one thing I've always wonder about. How can you have an "independent investigation" (free of government interference) with subpoena power? Since it's only the government who has this power. Seems to be a contradiction of terms to me. And what's so powerful about subpoena power anyway? It's just a piece of paper that says you have to appear...or face penalty...doesn't mean you have to tell the truth. Hell..if I was involved with the mass murder of 3000 of my fellow Americans...I don't think a subpoena is going to scare me that much. Maybe they are confusing it with prosecutorial power.

[Thunder]

i said this a few years ago. if this poll was accurate, and 33% of the USA believed that 9-11 was an inside job, than Truthers are the laziest cowards on the face of the Earth.

if 100 million (1/3rd of the USA) believed such things, and yet sooooo few of them show up to their marches and events, than they either lied about their beliefs, or are the biggest cowards or laziest pricks on Earth.

I have been to at least 5 political oriented marches in my life. Over subjects that I didn't really care about that much.

If I can get my ass to DC and Philly to march, than these morons can get their butts to NYC.

My prediction? In a metropolitan area of 20 million people, NYC will have around 150 Truthers turn out on 9-11-10.

pathetic...pathetic...pathetic.

[sts75]

Agreed. I just couldn't hold back on laughing at your snafu.

Much like your Snafu about BP bringing oil to the shores of the USA.

snafu.??

[Thunder]

WHY DONT YOU ASK THEM, YOU ATLEAST LIVE IN TE SAME COUNTRYM WHY ASK ME TO GUESS.
caps sorry.

you want ME to ask 30 million Truthers, they they don't show up to rallies, marches, and events?


i think I can figure this one out on my own.

they don't show up, cause they are the following:

1. Lazy
2. Cheap
3. Don't really give a damn.
4. Cowards

[Macgyver1968]

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/9/U/3/bp-oil-shores.jpg

It actually was one of their slogans.

[Macgyver1968]

you want ME to ask 30 million Truthers, they they don't show up to rallies, marches, and events?


i think I can figure this one out on my own.

they don't show up, cause they are the following:

1. Lazy
2. Cheap
3. Don't really give a damn.
4. Cowards

Um...you left out one:

5. too paranoid to leave home for fear of "big brother".

[triforcharity]

snafu.??

Its a polite way of saying "****up"

[sts75]

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/9/U/3/bp-oil-shores.jpg

It actually was one of their slogans.

I know, it just sailed over their heads like a 757.
Probably because i left 4 letters out that should have followed shore and that made my humour to deep for them to follow, altho i expect many just reading caught on..

l i n e

[sts75]

Its a polite way of saying "****up"


Much like your Snafu about BP bringing oil to the shores of the USA.


How embarrasing for you to be only one of 2 who verbally confirmed you missed the joke.
Its called gallows humour for Future ref.
Scan for it next time before making a muppit out of yourself.

Think shorelines as in shores.

[fess]

So many accusations and claims with no proof of any of them… whatsoever! Has any one noticed that not one self respecting “truther” has showed up to support this charade?

[UNLoVedRebel]

I am affraid truth has a different meaning in britain to the americanised version.

So does oral hygiene.

[Travis]

Ive had a gas.

So have I. So far all you have presented is that you think WTC7 collapsing looked like a controlled demolition.

I agree it does kinda look like one but for a good reason. Which is that a building collapsing......wait for it...........looks like a building collapsing!

I mean if you have some evidence of cutting charges, barotrauma, det cord, blasting caps and a mustached villain with his hands on a plunger then present it.

[sts75]

If you have evidence i have stated 7 went down by CD then please present it.
In fact if you can find any description from me other than visually impressive then please present it.

[djlunacee]

How embarrasing for you to be only one of 2 who verbally confirmed you missed the joke.
Its called gallows humour for Future ref.
Scan for it next time before making a muppit out of yourself.

Think shorelines as in shores.

Its not that we missed the joke, some of us just don't find it funny.

[sts75]

That will be why its alled gallows humour.

[Thunder]

If you have evidence i have stated 7 went down by CD then please present it. .

here ya go:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6026885#post6026885

"So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to."

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6026852#post6026852

"The demolition of 7 is not factless, unless ofcourse it didnt end up in a heap."

[sts75]

I will tell all of you this about 911, now you have me thinking about it again.

I watched it live on the tv in my back office.
The sight of those people that were jumping to their deaths is something that will never leave me, and still angers me to this day.

[Thunder]

evidence that you called the collapse of WTC 7 a CD has been presented.

what say you?

[sts75]

evidence that you called the collapse of WTC 7 a CD has been presented.

what say you?

This was his opening line.

So have I. So far all you have presented is that you think WTC7 collapsing looked like a controlled demolition.

Then he adds his own twist to that statement.

I mean if you have some evidence of cutting charges, barotrauma, det cord, blasting caps and a mustached villain with his hands on a plunger then present it.

do ya see the leap, do ya, its not a small leap, do ya see it.

[djlunacee]

Post 101 of this thread is all you, fight it all you want, your caught, in a flat out lie. Off to bed, hurry on now.

[T.A.M.]

If there are no doubts then why do americans march in the streets demanding a new independent enquiry.

lol...you mean the 500 or so EMO boys that gather in black shirts near GZ on the 9/11 ani? Ya, some protest.

Seriously, you are entitled to your opinion (as wrong, unfounded, and evidenceless bases as it may be). It just carries not weight here. You want to carry weight, or have anyone respect your opinion, you better bring evidence to back it up. Otherwise, why exactly did you join a skeptics Forum?

TAM:)

[TokenMac]

If you have evidence i have stated 7 went down by CD then please present it.
In fact if you can find any description from me other than visually impressive then please present it.

here ya go:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6026885#post6026885

"So what compelling evidence do you google experts have to convince me and the rest of the world we did not witness 7 going down in a controlled demolition as it appeared to."

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6026852#post6026852

"The demolition of 7 is not factless, unless ofcourse it didnt end up in a heap."

This was his opening line.

So have I. So far all you have presented is that you think WTC7 collapsing looked like a controlled demolition.

Then he adds his own twist to that statement.

I mean if you have some evidence of cutting charges, barotrauma, det cord, blasting caps and a mustached villain with his hands on a plunger then present it.

do ya see the leap, do ya, its not a small leap, do ya see it.

:confused:

[Thunder]

ok, so its clear that sts75 believes that he witnessed a CD in the collapse of WTC 7.

[T.A.M.]

sts75. Here on this forum, as you can imagine, we get a plethora of new posters who begin their posting foray with something like this...

"Hi guys, I am new here. While I am for the most part, sure that we know most of what occurred on 9/11, I do have a few problems with the official story, and here they are..."

They then go on to present a particular area (one that we here know all to well, as we have faced every godamn truther canard on the planet here over the last 4-5 years) that "concerns" them.

Over the course of the next 100 posts or so, upon their questions being answered, along with their seemingly bizarre refusal to accept such answers, it becomes clear that they were not really some innocent just looking for some clarification, but rather were simply trying to slip in under the radar, as some "jkust asking questions".

I am pretty sure something along these lines is anticipated to occur by many here, with regards to your posting.

TAM:)

[Macgyver1968]

Dont get mad munchkin, get even.

now he posted this.

This was his opening line.

So have I. So far all you have presented is that you think WTC7 collapsing looked like a controlled demolition.

Then he adds his own twist to that statement.

I mean if you have some evidence of cutting charges, barotrauma, det cord, blasting caps and a mustached villain with his hands on a plunger then present it.

do ya see the leap, do ya, its not a small leap, do ya see it.

FYI ST, TFC was a firefighter for FDNY and was at the scene on 9/11. He saw all the **** first hand. It's a violation of the board rules to insult other members.

[fess]

I certainly agree that individuals have the right to have an opinion on a subject, but sooner or later, one should show a reason why this opinion is valid, or, at least somewhat feasible.
However, when one makes baseless accusations that imply very serious transgressions by either individuals or government agencies, then definite proof must be offered. So far, I have seen no evidence put forth.
So, go to bed sts, sleep tight, and try to back up your claims tomorrow… if you can.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

The who and why is what most people want to know, and they want it from a legit source.


So, wait... You're saying that whatever information they've used to form their belief that 9/11 was an inside came from illegitimate sources?

We've known that for a long time.

[Travis]

So, wait, you aren't even going to try and present some evidence because you don't really think it was a controlled demolition you just think it looked like one? Then what is the point of all this? I've given you a reasonable answer as to why it looked similar so are there other reasons you think more tens of millions of dollars needs to be spent on yet more investigations? I mean besides your own curiosity.

[djlunacee]

Still not a shred of evidence, why should it differ tomorrow?

[DGM]

Has sts75 shown any technical reason (other then it didn't look right to a laymen) to doubt the "official" explanation? I'm not holding my breath mind you, just curious why this thread keeps going.

[Bell]

Has sts75 shown any technical reason (other then it didn't look right to a laymen) to doubt the "official" explanation? I'm not holding my breath mind you, just curious why this thread keeps going.

The "technical" reason being that sts75's "interest was strictly as bait, it was attractive bait as the hooked are still frantically flapping about, trying to verbally unhook themselves with taunt after taunt."

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6022401#post6022401

Ie, trolling.

[DGM]

The "technical" reason being that sts75's "interest was strictly as bait, it was attractive bait as the hooked are still frantically flapping about, trying to verbally unhook themselves with taunt after taunt."

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6022401#post6022401

Ie, trolling.
It sad in a way that this is all that's left of this so called "movement". I guess when you start with nothing and then rely on speculation and lies..............

[applecorped]

Time well spent.:rolleyes:

[Thunder]

sts75- if you have any legit. questions about 9-11, we are more than happy to answer them for you.

however, if you are just here to insult, redicule, defame, and troll, than 1/3rd of this forum will just ignore your posts, 1/3 will laugh at you, and the last 1/3 will report your posts and your stay here will be short.

the ball is in your court. life is what we make of it.

[carlitos]

Topic Reminder, for anyone interested:

"Why the Demolition of the WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Cover-up (sic)?"

ETA - Rule 12, then.

[Bell]

Topic Reminder, for anyone interested:

"Why the Demolition of the WTC 7 Created an Extraordinary Problem for the 911 Cover-up (sic)?"

Thank you. And this topic is going on for 7 pages, why exactly?

[Dave Rogers]

And this topic is going on for 7 pages, why exactly?

Slow news day. Yet again, the great 9/11 conspiracy appears not to have been exposed yet. Still, any time now...

Dave

[carlitos]

sts75, are you aware of the sub-forum and the topic you are posting in here? Do you have anything at all constructive to add?

[Gaspode]

Quite a few posts moved to AAH.

Keep it civil and on-topic from now on please.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I think Sts75 is following the 4 steps of being a Truther:

1. Deceive - Misrepresent the claims of 9/11 researchers into "Strawman" issues that are easily knocked down.

2. Dodge - Try to avoid or ignore any 9/11 evidence that you cannot explain away.

3. Deny - Refuse to acknowledge that any irrefutable evidence given is relevant to the 9/11 argument.

4. Discredit - Use any possible ad hominem accusation to ruin the credibility of 9/11 researchers.

Clearly logic & reasoning isn't STs75's specialty!

[Oystein]

...
Its no problem tho, as us europeans have known for many years that americans cannot take honest criticism, without mistaking it for a personal attack.

Oh golly... I am European too. I have lived in the USA for 2 1/2 years, and I can tell you that both sides have their problems with criticism, honest or otherwise. But in this forum, it really should boil down to the arguments and reason.

[ImANiceGuy]

Oh golly... I am European too. I have lived in the USA for 2 1/2 years, and I can tell you that both sides have their problems with criticism, honest or otherwise. But in this forum, it really should boil down to the arguments and reason.

You can't be reasoned out of something you weren't reasoned into in the first place.

[Oystein]

You can't be reasoned out of something you weren't reasoned into in the first place.

Huh??? :confused:

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Huh??? :confused:


He's just butchering a quote by Steven Novella, the president of the New England Skeptical Society: "You cannot reason someone out of a belief they did not reason their way into in the first place."

[WildCat]

Oh, the problems we have! Mobs of people marching in the streets, demanding a real investigation... oh wait, 9/11 truth is about as relevant as moon hoaxers. I wonder who will deliver the Buzz Aldrin treatment to some WAC nut?

[dc1971]

There were Class A fuels which contained a large amount of sulphur burning in the pile. There were lead-acid batteries every bloody place. The acid in those batteries is SULPHURIC acid. FDNY started pouring water on the pile from the get-go and didn't stop until most of the pile had been dug up. Much of it turned to steam under the pile.

If you heat sheet rock, it will release sulphur compounds. You burn rubber and cheap dieselm it releases sulphur componds You heat a sulphuric acid solution, it will produce an acid vapor.

Combine that with steam and you have a highly reactive acid that will do a serious number on steel. The acid rain was produced in an enclosed space by FDNY.

To add on to it, you have a skyscraper that is basically a big block of electricity and electrical circuits, a jet plane loaded with fuel causing friction as it initially hits the surface of the building and fuel being ignited as the jet blows apart and causes outstanding damage to the building. Therefore you don't just have fuel fires but electrical fires, ignition of flammable surfaces such as furniture, carpeting, luggage, and (may they rest in peace) human bodies. Having multiple electrical fires are enough to heat up and weaken a strong piece of steel.

[dc1971]

Oh, the problems we have! Mobs of people marching in the streets, demanding a real investigation... oh wait, 9/11 truth is about as relevant as moon hoaxers. I wonder who will deliver the Buzz Aldrin treatment to some WAC nut?

Although I happen to think this Tea Party movement is somewhat scary! What do you think? Do you think the Tea Party was transpired by the 9/11 Truther movement?

[Dog Town]

Although I happen to think this Tea Party movement is somewhat scary! What do you think? Do you think the Tea Party was transpired by the 9/11 Truther movement?

Not a chance, they wish! The word you're looking for is OBAMA!
Simple really.

[JohnG]

He's just butchering a quote by Steven Novella, the president of the New England Skeptical Society: "You cannot reason someone out of a belief they did not reason their way into in the first place."


Novella has mentioned that quote on occasion, but I believe it is properly attributed to Michael Shermer.

[kookbreaker]

Novella has mentioned that quote on occasion, but I believe it is properly attributed to Michael Shermer.

Actually, I think it goes back to Mark Twain.

[JohnG]

Actually, I think it goes back to Mark Twain.


Cite? I googled it just now and the only result that ties that quote to Mark Twain is your post. I wouldn't be surprised if Shermer didn't coin the phrase in question, but the searches I did yesterday all seem to go back to him. In any case it definitely didn't originate from Steve Novella.;)

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Novella has mentioned that quote on occasion, but I believe it is properly attributed to Michael Shermer.

Cite? I googled it just now and the only result that ties that quote to Mark Twain is your post. I wouldn't be surprised if Shermer didn't coin the phrase in question, but the searches I did yesterday all seem to go back to him. In any case it definitely didn't originate from Steve Novella.;)


I'll have to ask for citation for your claim, too. In Google, the exact phrase + Shermer's name points back to this thread. It's likely Shermer didn't use the exact same words, of course, but a search without the quotes returns results that are much too vague.

[Mel Odious]

An old book of quotations I have credits that line to Jonathan Swift (1667-1745). The exact wording is:

It is useless for us to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he has never been reasoned into.

[JohnG]

An old book of quotations I have credits that line to Jonathan Swift (1667-1745). The exact wording is:

It is useless for us to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he has never been reasoned into.


I'm seeing that, too and I stand corrected. Thanks very much!

Now, who did Swift crib it from?;)

[dafydd]

I'm seeing that, too and I stand corrected. Thanks very much!

Now, who did Swift crib it from?;)

"All culture is plagiarism."-Charles Seeger.